- From: Christian Geuer-Pollmann <geuer-pollmann@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>
- Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:17:24 +0100
- To: Joseph Kesselman <keshlam@us.ibm.com>, Joseph Kesselman <Joseph_Kesselman@lotus.com>
- Cc: XML Signature WG <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Hi Joe, --On Montag, 26. November 2001 14:00 -0500 Joseph Kesselman <keshlam@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Xalan does put a heavy emphasis on standards compliance. But my best Yes, we all know this and Xalan is a wonderful product. > information at this time suggests that the XSLT committee has recognized > that this concept of replicating the Namespace Nodes onto all the > descendents was a Bad Idea in the first place, and that they are planning > to remove the ability to ask the questions which expose this difference. > If they do so, Xalan will probably be fully compliant as it stands. > > I'm not sure why this affects anyone writing a canonicalizer. Ideally, you > shouldn't care where the namespace was actually declared. Since that > doesn't affect the semantics of the document, I would expect > canonicalization to suppress that information...? You're right. Canonical XML defines exactly in which elements the namespace decls have to appear. And yes, the canonical xml implementation from Apache works with the current version of Xalan. Thanks, Christian
Received on Monday, 26 November 2001 14:14:38 UTC